The Gospel Coalition

If you were unable to make it to Chicago this week, you can still watch the main sessions of The Gospel Coalition live, thanks to Desiring God.

Jon Acuff gives some tips to churches about their websites:

I’m always looking at websites with a fairly critical eye so when it came time to visit a new church, I found myself analyzing their site. Or “pre-judging,” if you will, deciding I knew exactly what type of church they were based on their site. In order to pay penance for that ridiculousness I thought I might write a list of 5 things churches need to remember when creating a website and what you need to remember when you get all judgy…

In May, Redeemer Bible Church in Minneapolis will be hosting a conference with Paul David Tripp and R.W. Glenn entitled “The Pastor and His Family: When Ministry Becomes Idolatry.” Details here.

A classical Arminian’s response to Roger Olson’s inclusivism

The Marvel of the Gospel:

The marvel of the gospel is that it deals with our objective guilt. Then we begin to appreciate our new standing before God. At that point, God begins to transform our feelings.

How do you know if you have fallen for the moralistic counterfeit gospel? Here are two easy diagnostics:

First, think about how you react to suffering and pain. How do you view God when you pass through a terrible trial?

Moralists immediately think, What have I done to deserve this? Doesn’t God see all the good I’ve done? Because you see God as a sort of cosmic employer, you have certain expectations of him. When God doesn’t meet these expectations, you become angry. Eventually, your disillusionment leads to despair. You think that all your efforts at pleasing God must be useless.

The second diagnostic is to check your heart whenever you see someone else benefiting from God’s grace.

Not too long ago, I found out that an acquaintance had recently been given a new ministry opportunity and a promotion. How did my heart respond to this news? By sinking into jealousy rather than leaping for joy. The thoughts that raced through my mind (Why did God do that for him and not me? Am I not deserving?) stood in opposition to grace. I had to repent again and ask God to so change my heart that I would rejoice in His grace being showered on others.

The moralistic gospel resembles the famous Bob Newhart skit, in which his counsel to broken people seeking change is to continually yell, “Stop it!” To be sure, the New Testament contains many commands. In fact, there are times when you could paraphrase Paul as saying, “Stop it!” But notice that God’s commands are always grounded in God’s past actions. The imperatives (commands) are based in indicatives (statements about what God has done).

Tullian Tchividjian puts it this way: “Imperatives divorced from indicatives become impossibilities.” This is the logic of the gospel. You can see the journey from indicative to imperative running throughout Paul’s letters, most often turning on the word “therefore.”

“You are not under law but under grace” and you “have been brought from death to life (indicatives Romans 6:14, 13), therefore “let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body. . . . Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness” (imperatives Romans 6:12-13).

The first three chapters of Ephesians explain the gospel in terms of God’s redemptive plan, our powerlessness to save ourselves, and God’s bringing together Jew and Gentile alike. Then in chapter 4, Paul begins to list ways to apply the gospel message. “Therefore,” he says and proceeds to give us commands that are grounded in the gospel.

Or take a look at Galatians 5:24 and 16: “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (indicative), therefore, “walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh” (imperative).

If we focus our attention on what we are to do without grounding our lives in what Christ has done, we will become disillusioned. That’s why so many people who never seem to get any traction in the Christian life walk the aisle again and again. They recommit their lives to Christ, saying, “I’ll try harder this time! I’ll be more serious!” only to become deflated and disappointed that they feel no power in their Christian life.

The result of the moralistic gospel is despair. But that despair is what can and should lead us to the biblical gospel of grace – the true gospel that exposes the counterfeit and brings lasting behavioral change, precisely because it’s not first about outward change but inward transformation by the cross of Jesus Christ.

- excerpt from Counterfeit Gospels: Rediscovering the Good News in a World of False Hope, pgs 123-5.

I’m heading up to Chicago today, preparing to attend The Gospel Coalition national conference this week. I’m looking forward to Band of Bloggers on Tuesday night. I’m also excited to be participating in a lunchtime panel discussion with Matt Chandler, Jonathan Leeman, and Kevin DeYoung on Wednesday about “The Gospel and the Mission of the Church.” Later that afternoon (from 4-5 p.m.), I’ll be doing a book signing at the bookstore. One of the reasons I enjoy conferences like this is because of the opportunity to connect with readers of this blog. If you’re going to TGC, please stop by and say hi.

Michael Flaherty speaks out on Dawn Treader‘s box office and the criticism of how Eustace’s “undragoning” was handled:

What’s interesting is that when you read the book, you actually don’t see that scene; Eustace just recounts it when he gets back in the boat. We wanted to show it, but what we ended up doing was reinforcing that message when Eustace says later, “No matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t do it myself. And then he came towards me. It was a good hurt.”

Cool infographic laying out different languages and the level of difficulty English-speakers have in learning them

Ed Stetzer on why his church plant cooperates with other Southern Baptist churches in fulfilling the Great Commission:

The Cooperative Program gives our church the opportunity to partner with other churches in our denominational family to be involved in all kinds of work. Though there is no set number (nor should there be), we sent 10% of our undesignated giving because we are glad to be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Here are four reasons I think other churches should consider doing the same…

The Sleepless Elite:

For a small group of people—perhaps just 1% to 3% of the population—sleep is a waste of time. Natural “short sleepers,” as they’re officially known, are night owls and early birds simultaneously. They typically turn in well after midnight, then get up just a few hours later and barrel through the day without needing to take naps or load up on caffeine.

O God and Lord of the Powers,
and Maker of all creation,
Who, because of Your compassion and incomparable mercy,
chose to send Your only-begotten Son and our Lord Jesus Christ
for the salvation of mankind,
and with His venerable Cross tore asunder the record of our sins,
and thereby conquered the rulers and powers of darkness;
receive from us sinful people, O merciful Master,
these prayers of gratitude and supplication,
and deliver us from every destructive and gloomy transgression,
and from all visible and invisible enemies who seek to injure us.
Nail down our flesh with fear of You,
and let not our hearts be inclined to words or thoughts of evil,
but pierce our souls with Your love,
that ever contemplating You, being enlightened by You, and discerning You,
the unapproachable and everlasting Light,
we may unceasingly render confession and gratitude to You:
The eternal Father,
with Your only-begotten Son,
and with Your all-holy, gracious, and life-giving Spirit,
now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.

- Basil the Great, 330-379

To summarize: Paul viewed the gospel as centering upon Jesus Christ and what God has done through him. The essential points of the gospel are Jesus Christ’s status as the Son of God, his genuine humanity, his death for our sins, his burial, resurrection, subsequent appearances, and future coming in judgment . . . that one is justified by faith in the gracious work of Jesus Christ in his death and resurrection. . . . [It is not] merely a recital of theological truths and historical events. Rather, it relates these truths and events to the situation of every individual believer.

- Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 1063

Seven links for your weekend reading:

1. Our New and Exalted Identity

2. The Problem with Christus Victor

3. Interesting commentary from Peter Leithart on Dostoevsky’s “The Grand Inquisitor” from The Brothers Karamazov

4. Elect or Elite? Why Arrogance Has No Place in Reformed Theology

5. Tim Challies - To Know and Be Known

6. Fox News Drops Glenn Beck

7. What Churches Can Learn from Southwest Airlines

I’ve long admired the work of Sarah Pulliam Bailey, a Christianity Today editor whose work online keeps me informed regarding current events around the world of interest to evangelicals. Today, Sarah joins me for a conversation about the media and religion.

Trevin Wax: Sarah, thanks for stopping by. Tell us a little about yourself.

Sarah Pulliam Bailey: During the day, I am online editor for Christianity Today, where I write and edit for the print and online magazine. I tend to focus on news, update our blogs and social media, and pursue book interviews, profiles, and features. On the side, I write 2-3 times a week for GetReligion.org, where we critique mainstream coverage of religion news. I also write a monthly column for the Indianapolis Star on culture and politics. I grew up in Indianapolis, went to Wheaton College, and now I live in Green Bay where my husband works for the newspaper. Needless to say, my day is filled with journalism, especially of the religion variety. On the side, I attempt to cook and enjoy a good board game with friends.

Trevin Wax: Let’s start with your work on GetReligion, which has recently become one of my favorite blogs. The tagline for that site is “the press just doesn’t get religion…” Why do you think this is the case? What are the main blind spots that the press has when it comes to religion reporting?

Sarah Pulliam Bailey: Reporters work really well with concrete data, numbers that prove some thesis or trend. It’s difficult to capture religion because you can’t always quantify it. Journalists don’t always know what to do when someone says they did something because “it was God’s will” or “God called me to do this.” We’re told to capture who, what, where, when, why, and how questions, but reporters often gloss over the “why” question. Why would people give away money, why would people volunteer their time, why would they hold certain beliefs about politics, money, sex, family, entertainment, etc. Sometimes reporters just miss one of the key factors in a story.

We often stumble across interesting stories that miss an underlying religion angle, what we call a ghost. Sometimes it might be skepticism (such as in sports writing) or sometimes it’s ignorance. A 2007 Pew report suggested that 8 percent of journalists say they attend a church or synagogue weekly and 29 percent of them never attend services. You do not have to be religious to report on religion or find religion angles, but your personal experience might impact how important you think religion could be in a story. Then we often see stories that just miss the mark, such as calling Jim Wallis a face of the religious right. Even for those data-driven reporters, there are several sociology, political science, history, etc. scholars offering research or “expert advice” on recent trends to keep reports accurate.

Trevin Wax: I wonder how detrimental this oversight is to reporting on other issues. I’m often amazed at how the Middle East conflicts are so often conceived of in purely secular terms, as if religion is not a key factor in the battles raging in other parts of the world. Stephen Prothero has pointed this out in God is Not One. Many Americans tend to think that religion is relegated to the realm of speculation and private spirituality, and many journalists appear to follow that pattern in how they report on news stories in other parts of the world. Do you think “not getting religion” hinders our ability to understand some of the world’s great conflicts?

Sarah Pulliam Bailey: Yes, I think your point is key: journalists often look at international events through a political or economic lens. I’m amazed at how many events are seen through election coverage (“Libya a political challenge for Obama“) and not through other factors, such as religion. For instance, the local response to the Japan earthquake is likely very different from the Haiti earthquake, just based on the religiosity of the people impacted. Even if a story has foreign policy implications, some reporters underestimate the impact religion plays in another country’s leadership. Most religion reporters are locally or nationally focused, so we don’t see much international religion coverage from those who are on the religion beat. Newsrooms have time, budget, and manpower constraints, and a story on Justin Bieber’s haircut will probably see many more hits than an angle on Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. However, Reuters’ FaithWorld blog is one mainstream outlet that does a nice job at finding the international religion angles.

Trevin Wax: Occasionally, the media does pick up on a religion story, but it’s usually about something sensational. So you get media outlets camped out in the yard of a tiny church where Terry Jones plans to burn a Koran, or they take out of context the pope’s quote about Christian names and make it out that he is condemning other kinds of names. Is there an anti-Christian bent that causes media outlets to jump on stories like this? Or is it a desire to be first in reporting the most sensationalist news out there?

Sarah Pulliam Bailey: Pew recently released its annual report that includes the state of religion coverage. Last year it doubled–to just 2 percent of overall coverage. Of course, these are stories that are particularly focused on religion, as opposed to a story that might have an underlying religious angles (Haiti earthquake, for instance). The top five were the Park 51 controversy, the Catholic abuse scandal, Terry Jones, religion and the Obama administration, and Sept. 11. It’s interesting to see a few items like Park 51 covered so heavily and then dropped almost completely.

I don’t necessarily see evidence of an anti-Christian bent from most reporters, but there are probably elements that contribute to why they cover Christianity a certain way. For instance, the Terry Jones story was partly fueled by statements from Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (again, that political filter). Or Pope Benedict XVI statements are often poorly translated due to language and distance constraints or theological and historical misunderstandings. Plus, there aren’t always obvious leadership structures. For instance, Protestants don’t have someone like Pope Benedict XVI to determine when something is significant, so the diversity can be confusing.

Occasionally, we’ll see an agenda-driven reporter or someone who just doesn’t understand Christianity or religion broadly, but it depends on the outlet. There probably is some pressure to jump on something before the next reporter, and it might get messy if the outlet doesn’t have a religion reporter or editor on staff who is at least guiding the coverage. When you see a quick blog post or tweet take off, it’s hard not to want to follow-up with more full-blown coverage, even if it might not be the most important story to cover.

Trevin Wax: A lot of attention in the blogosphere in recent weeks has gone to Rob Bell’s Love Wins and the controversy surrounding the semi-universalist beliefs put forth there. Martin Bashir of MSNBC interviewed Rob in a rather confrontational manner, and his interview raised some bigger questions about how journalists treat pastors and religious figures. Some folks have complained that left-leaning religious leaders are given softballs, whereas traditional Catholic or conservative evangelical leaders are asked tough questions, framed in a no-win situation for the leader. How do the assumptions of a television host influence the way interviews are done with religious leaders?

Sarah Pulliam Bailey: You’re right that Martin Bashir was pretty confrontational in his interview with Rob Bell, and we’ve had some discussion about whether it was appropriate. On one hand, it was refreshing to see someone challenge Bell after seeing some softball interviews but on the other, he was pretty pushy in such a short interview.

Part of a journalist’s challenge is to figure out what’s new, so if conservative leaders reiterate what’s been said for thousands of years, the reporter might feel the need to come up with more provocative questions to break new ground. If a more left-leaning religious leader says something provocative to begin with, the reporter might just feel like throwing softballs will make it a spicy interview anyway. There’s an underlying journalistic challenge that might shape the way reporters do interviews.

It’s clear that Bashir has some theological background that informed the way he conducted the interview. He asked the kinds of questions that someone without religious background would probably not know to ask. Some might argue that the questions risk going over the head of most MSNBC viewers, so it’s better to have someone who is less theologically literate. But regardless of Bashir’s approach, the kinds of questions assume a more intelligent audience that raises the interview past the surface level. Someone with a religious background might be more attuned to the theological issues, but any journalist can become more literate in these areas.

Trevin Wax: Sarah, thank you for the good discussion on the media and religion. And keep up the good work in your writing and reporting!

Burning the Qur’an and Crucifying Christ:

The burning of the Qur’an and the murder of human beings are not morally equivalent. That’s true. And it is, frankly, outrageous the way some commentators speak with more moral indignation about the burning of holy books than the butchery of human bodies. In the western media this seems to me to be sheer fear.

How to make telling someone “no” fun:

I saw this handled in a great way on a recent flight. For the lady in front of me who insisted on going to the restroom while the seat belt sign was still on: “Ma’am, I can’t tell you that you can get up. If you get up and then you fall, the airline is liable. So you can’t get up. But I’m about to walk to the front of the plane, and I don’t necessarily know if you obey me or not.”

Here’s a list of the books being given away at this year’s Band of Bloggers. Looking forward to connecting with friends next week in Chicago!

Who’s obsessed with sex and abortion? Robert George says it’s not Christians:

So there is a debate about whether Christians are obsessed with homosexuality and abortion.  Well, some people seem to be obsessed with homosexuality and abortion, but is it Christians? I don’t think so.  For heaven’s sake, just tune in to network TV for a few hours, or watch the Academy Awards broadcast, or visit a university, or talk to people in Hollywood or San Francisco or Hyde Park or on the Upper West Side.  Is there a cause more fashionable in the elite sector of the culture than “gay rights”?

Last Thursday, James MacDonald gathered a group of mega-church pastors for a conference called “The Elephant Room.” The sessions featured lively discussion and friendly debate regarding a number of controversial methodological, theological, and practical issues related to church ministry. (See notes here.) One of the most interesting sessions was David Platt and James MacDonald’s conversation on sacrifice and generosity.

David Platt made the case that wealth and money, though not inherently sinful, are dangerous in the hands of sinful people. Our current context of self-indulgence needs to be challenged. Spiritual transformation leads to material transformation. The gospel gives us generous hearts that overflow into radical sacrifice for God’s eternal purposes. When God blesses us financially, He intends us to give to others.

James MacDonald warned that a distorted version of Platt’s teaching equates “poverty” and “spirituality.” Instead, MacDonald believes we need a full-orbed theology of joy in God that includes joy in the good gifts God has given us. Emphasizing radical sacrifice can lead to poverty theology that is all about the immediate divesting of money rather than the multiplication of money that will lead to greater involvement in mission.

The Points of Agreement

The MacDonald/Platt discussion was tense at times, perhaps because the practical ramifications of how we think about money always hit close to home. Still, there are three major points on which Platt and MacDonald agree:

1. Money and possessions are a good gift from God.
2. Money and possessions can become idolatrous.
3. We are called to exercise stewardship of our finances in a way that pleases the Lord and furthers the spread of His name.

The Debate

Even though Platt and MacDonald would “Amen” each of these points, they have diverging views on the particulars of how these truths should be applied. MacDonald believes we need a theology of joy that reiterates point #1. Platt believes we are underestimating the idolatrous pull of point #2. Then, because MacDonald emphasizes #1 and Platt focuses on #2, they have radically different notions about how to apply #3.

I feel the tension of this discussion at a deeply personal level. When I lived in Romania, I wrestled daily with the tension of being one of the “haves” in a world of “have-nots.” Over the course of my years overseas, all my categories were shattered, so that I was confused, challenged, content, frustrated, joyful, and well-meaning at different moments and in different ways. Here are the cycles of my personal journey:

1. Culture Shock at Poverty

When I first began ministry overseas, I was deeply moved by the poverty I noticed. Early on, I wrote an email to family and friends:

You know I am not one to dwell on the bad things or poverty, but sometimes, the situations here can really get to me… Every now and then I wish to be home to just have a good long cry about all the things that happen here. Here, it’s impossible, because it’s almost like you’re in a bubble, and you have to separate your heart from your mind somewhat, just to make it through emotionally. Your mind can see something, but you have to keep it from getting to your heart until you have time to really process what you’ve seen and carry with you the emotional baggage that comes with it.

The longer I was in Romania, the more I realized that even poor Romanian villages would be considered “rich” by the standards of third-world countries. Poverty is defined in so many different ways, and the way we define poverty impinges on how we spread the gospel. Many times, I have asked David Platt’s question: “How do we proclaim the gospel in a world in which utter poverty (no drinking water, starving people, enormous economic needs) is so prevalent?”

2. Culture Shock at Wealth

Upon returning to the U.S. after spending a year away, I was surprised by our wealth. I remember arriving back in Nashville, and asking – in the fog of jet lag – “When did they put a new car lot near the airport?” Dad answered: “That’s just the parking lot, Trevin.” Strange, but after so much time away, my mind couldn’t conceive of the fact that all the new, shiny cars were owned by average citizens. Even now, I remember the feeling I had when I noticed how easy it was to walk downstairs and get a glass of water. After having lived in a village with no indoor plumbing, water from the refrigerator seemed like a luxury.

3. Frustration with Materialism

The longer I looked at the U.S. from the outside in, the more I noticed our excess wealth. Closets stuffed full of junk… credit card debt racked up on frivolities… churches budgeting thousands of dollars to activities that seemed designed more for the comfort of church members than God’s mission in the world… Our priorities seemed so out of line!

And then there was the day I received an email invitation to take a pastor-led cruise with a number of famous preachers. I remember the odd feeling of walking from the computer to the window where I could see homeless Gypsies scavenging through the dumpster outside our apartment complex. The jarring juxtaposition of wealth and poverty frustrated me.

4. Repentance for my Patronizing Attitude

After the period of frustration, the Lord convicted my heart for my superior attitude toward my Romanian brothers and sisters. My initial mindset had been: “I’m the rich American here to help the poor Romanians.” That attitude was unhealthy, anti-gospel, and ultimately untrue.

God opened my eyes to see the problem of dividing people into categories of “rich and poor.” I had the opportunity to serve alongside “poor” Romanians who were doing mercy ministry to poorer people. We prayed as Romanian missionaries went to third-world countries to spread the gospel. Over time, my categories were shattered. Christians are poor in spirit, called to be generous. Forget the categories. Quit patronizing our brothers and sisters, many of whom are richer spiritually than we’ll ever be. We’re united in our service by the cross, not the size of our wallets.

5. Repentance for my Judgmental Attitude

Then, God started in on me from another angle. He exposed my judgmental attitude toward “wealthy Americans.” Though I had looked with disgust at the idea of a “pastor’s cruise,” I eventually realized that this type of vacation was attractive to many pastors – not because they were idolatrous materialists, but because being “inaccessible” on a cruise is one of the only ways they can feel truly “off”. A pastor-led cruise may, for some, lead to rest and spiritual renewal in a way I had not considered. Whatever the reasons, I needed to repent of my patronizing attitude to the poor and my superior attitude to the rich.

Where Do We Go from Here?

One of the most helpful books I have read on the subject of wealth is Neither Poverty nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Possessions by Craig Blomberg. The points that Platt and MacDonald agree on are declared loudly and clearly in Blomberg’s work. We can gratefully enjoy God’s gifts. We must beware of the idolization of wealth. We must give where we want our heart to be.

I don’t claim to have figured out the debate about radical generosity and stewardship. But there are places where I think both emphases could lead to unhealthy extremes.

MacDonald is right that there is nothing inherently spiritual about poverty. But I’m cautious about his statement that financial blessing flows to fruitfulness. Sometimes. Maybe often. But not all the time. I’ve served alongside many pastors who didn’t reap financial rewards, even though they had very fruitful ministries. Conflating financial blessing with fruitfulness can lead to unwarranted appreciation of prosperity-gospel teachers who confuse the two (just as the ancient world did). Christ has set us free from the shackles of “success” defined by the world.

Platt is right that we live in a culture that seeks joy in more and more things. His focus on “radical sacrifice” as the outworking of gospel generosity should be commended. But I’m cautious that Platt’s teaching could be turned into a legalistic, obligatory exercise that leaves little room for the full-orbed theology of joy that MacDonald talks about.

A couple months ago, Platt tweeted: About to coach my first T-ball practice. Scared. Really scared. The next tweet was: Exhausted. Stressed. Filthy. Sore. Glad to be coach. Grateful to be dad. I chuckled when I read those tweets, and I was glad to see them. Why? Because that image of joy-filled leisure and recreation can easily get lost in the “radical” image that comes through Platt’s books, conference messages, and the branding machine of the publishing industry.

Conclusion

The more I think about those three points, the more I am convinced that it’s not a “balance between the three” that is necessary, but a radical, unshakeable commitment to all three.

• We need to pursue joy in the God who gives us good gifts, intentionally basking in His goodness to us, growing in gratitude for His provision, and enjoying His gifts as the good things they are.
• We also need to be radical in our realization of how idolatrous good things can become when they take the throne of our lives. Our commitment to enjoying the good things of life should be matched by our ruthless efforts to root out idols from our lives, to find our satisfaction in God alone, and not just the gifts He gives us.
• In the end, radical stewardship will look different from person to person, from church to church, – but we are all called to be good stewards, to prioritize rightly, to sacrifice for the King out of gospel-soaked generous hearts. Radical sacrifice must always overflow from a heart that is gripped by the gospel; otherwise, it becomes a joyless and fruitless effort of self-righteousness.

Raising Up Leaders:

Suddenly realizing that you are to be a leader among God’s people is exhilarating and frightening all at once. The excitement of the task and the weight of the responsibility come crashing in like a violent grace. In his call for me to leadership in the church, God provided a course-altering gift into my life…

The IKEA Effect: When Labor Leads to Love

Labor is not just a meaningful experience – it’s also a marketable one. When instant cake mixes were introduced, in the 1950s, housewives were initially resistant:The mixes were too easy, suggesting that their labor was undervalued. When manufacturers changed the recipe to require the addition of an egg, adoption rose dramatically. Ironically, increasing the labor involved – making the task more arduous – led to greater liking.

Divine Wrath: Consequence or Curse?

The whole warp and woof of the Bible demonstrates that God does more than simply allow bad choices to run their course and spill over into bad consequences. He actively and decisively punishes those who violate his law.

Tolkien fans will enjoy these pictures from a house that look’s like a hobbit’s: